Huddle Censorship

[rev ronin]

Since there's been quite a lot about AAPA censoring civil discourse on Huddle, I'd like to provide a separate thread for AAPA members to discuss the AAPA-owned discussion forum's censorship of their posts.

Huddle is a competitor to this site, but to the extent that discussion happens there rather than here, it makes MY job easier. But paradoxically, given that it exists, I want to see Huddle succeed.  AAPA has been horridly unresponsive to feedback, and had just started to change things up, in my personal opinion, before this last raft of draconian censorship.  Thus, I want to encourage AAPA members to openly collaborate here to take huddle back from the censors and foster the same (or nearly the same) level of openness there we have here.  I think the profession needs it.

[sas5814]

I needed a fresh thread because things are getting very interesting. If anyone is following the Huddle James Anderson is acting as a hit man for David Jackson. Under the guise of being concerned he has maligned Dave Mittman and is now setting sites on PAFT who was a major force behind OTP. He is devious beyond belief in that he says things in such a way as to make it look like he has some legit interest in the issue when in fact he is simply smearing anyone and any organization that is strongly in favor of OTP. he is doing it, I believe, in conjunction with, or at least with the tacit approval, of David Jackson who is running for AAPA president. James and David are thick as thieves. 

This needs to be called out now and often and loudly because  voting is taking place and these two intend to kill off OTP which will cripple this profession possibly forever. The Huddle is deleting posts of anyone who says anything negative about James Anderson's motives.

[sas5814]

Thanks Rev. I just started a new thread that probably belong here. I don't want to duplicate it. If you can move it please do. If not I'll just leave it out there.

[corpsman89]

I posted the link to this thread, and informed anyone listening that they could come here if they feel they are being unreasonably censored. 

[sas5814]

Me too but I started a new Huddle thread to do it. I suspect it will get deleted as well.

 

[sas5814]

11 minutes ago, corpsman89 said:

I posted the link to this thread, and informed anyone listening that they could come here if they feel they are being unreasonably censored. 

They will delete your thread because it has huddlecensorship in it. Hell they may delete all of them. There seems to be some forces at play trying very hard to control the conversation.

[rev ronin]

32 minutes ago, sas5814 said:

Thanks Rev. I just started a new thread that probably belong here. I don't want to duplicate it. If you can move it please do. If not I'll just leave it out there.

Which one did you want merged into this? That's certainly doable.

[sas5814]

David Jackson wants to dismantle OTP

Thanks

[rev ronin]

3 minutes ago, sas5814 said:

David Jackson wants to dismantle OTP

OK, Merged.  Leaving this here so people know why it might read a bit choppy at first.

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

I’m not as conspiracy theorist about the huddle censorship. I do think that they are adhering to rules more arbitrarily than in the spirit of such rules. 

I will agree that James Anderson seems to be as politically savvy as any congressman, so he knows how to underhandedly imply ethics violations in the form of a question rather than a statement so it won’t be deleted. I also believe him to be the lackey of David Jackson.

[Reality Check 2]

I refused to join AAPAs Huddle because it doesn't allow for anonymity to discuss hard subjects.

Employers are increasingly scrutinizing any type of social media and using the findings in hirings, firings, etc. For those of us who wish to discuss, criticize, theorize or imagine - some level of anonymity is quite helpful. 

The only reason I have a LinkedIN sign in is because my Dad put me on there to see his stuff. Otherwise, nothing there. You won't find me on Facebook or anything else. Too risky, too public, not my style. If YOU need to know something from me - I will find you. 

Now, AAPA is showing its true colors by censoring threads that are "too touchy" or too controversial and they want it all fuzzy, warm and loving. Well, life don't work that way and medicine sure doesn't.

I have never cared much about the AAPA leadership until now - we have the stodgy old farts who are afraid to adapt and the progressives who want to adapt and improve. Not hard to figure out - I want progress. 

I didn't renew my AAPA and now am happy I didn't. I don't need them representing me if they have no intention of listening to constituents. We have enough of that BS in national government.

Keep talking folks. Ask hard questions. Push those who are supposed to represent to actually do so. 

[corpsman89]

1 hour ago, Reality Check 2 said:

I refused to join AAPAs Huddle because it doesn't allow for anonymity to discuss hard subjects.

Employers are increasingly scrutinizing any type of social media and using the findings in hirings, firings, etc. For those of us who wish to discuss, criticize, theorize or imagine - some level of anonymity is quite helpful. 

The only reason I have a LinkedIN sign in is because my Dad put me on there to see his stuff. Otherwise, nothing there. You won't find me on Facebook or anything else. Too risky, too public, not my style. If YOU need to know something from me - I will find you. 

Now, AAPA is showing its true colors by censoring threads that are "too touchy" or too controversial and they want it all fuzzy, warm and loving. Well, life don't work that way and medicine sure doesn't.

I have never cared much about the AAPA leadership until now - we have the stodgy old farts who are afraid to adapt and the progressives who want to adapt and improve. Not hard to figure out - I want progress. 

I didn't renew my AAPA and now am happy I didn't. I don't need them representing me if they have no intention of listening to constituents. We have enough of that BS in national government.

Keep talking folks. Ask hard questions. Push those who are supposed to represent to actually do so. 

Well said, but your presence and vote will be missed. 

[DrJazzyPAC]

James Anderson claims to have coauthored the FSMB resolution that supports OTP and beyond. How can this be?  

[rev ronin]

34 minutes ago, DrJazzyPAC said:

James Anderson claims to have coauthored the FSMB resolution that supports OTP and beyond. How can this be?  

You're welcome to invite him to register here (if he isn't already; we don't require people to provide real names) and explain his rationale in writing what he did.

[corpsman89]

So it appears that either Mr. Anderson or Huddle modorators have changed the title of Mr. Andersons post asking David Mittman about his "ethics." The word "ethics" was taken out. 

Title went from:

Question about Candidate Mittmans Ethics.

To:

Question for Candidate Mittman. 

Not a big deal, but why the change? And who did it? 

[rev ronin]

8 minutes ago, corpsman89 said:

Not a big deal, but why the change? And who did it? 

Because someone noted that censoring members questioning Anderson on his ethics, while allowing Anderson to question Mittman on his ethics was too obviously unfair to stand?  Here's hoping some fair-minded supervisors are now trying to untangle the weekend's mess.

[sas5814]

11 hours ago, rev ronin said:

You're welcome to invite him to register here (if he isn't already; we don't require people to provide real names) and explain his rationale in writing what he did.

He was invited to do that in the Huddle and all he said was some non-answer stuff like "I feel the article was fair and balanced." I want him in the spotlight as much as possible because his MO is to smear and imply by using supposedly fair questions that create a false narrative. He is after PAFT now....you know the group that was a major force in getting OTP pushed through.

[corpsman89]

Its almost like there is some weird group think or code talk going on with the huddle. Its a bit eerie.  

[ProSpectre]

56 minutes ago, corpsman89 said:

So it appears that either Mr. Anderson or Huddle modorators have changed the title of Mr. Andersons post asking David Mittman about his "ethics." The word "ethics" was taken out. 

Title went from:

Question about Candidate Mittmans Ethics.

To:

Question for Candidate Mittman. 

Not a big deal, but why the change? And who did it? 

They just replied saying "The post was changed at the request of the original poster". Interesting that Mr. Anderson has taken the time to attempt to cover his tracks there, but hasn't responded to all of the comments on the thread about the article he has written.

[sas5814]

I am chilling on the Huddle right now. I punched enough people in the face in the last few days and set a new personal record for deleted posts.

[corpsman89]

Just now, sas5814 said:

I am chilling on the Huddle right now. I punched enough people in the face in the last few days and set a new personal record for deleted posts.

HA! They really have a hard time handling real and honest talk. 

[EMEDPA]

I had 3 deleted in as many hrs. I got a warning that if I continued to post inflammatory posts that my posts would require "moderation" before appearing.

[sas5814]

I have a response to that which would probably get deleted from the Huddle.